Making a new friend in the blogosphere is pretty special, since we have so many people to choose from. For quite a while, until recently, I looked forward to meeting ThomasLB, "Your Ever Well-Wisher" on his blog. He had a consistent theme of peace and "a quiet spirit", and he drew from a most interesting background. He was someone I could learn from. But he's disappeared.
Come back from hibernation, Mr. Well-Wisher! I don't want to take you off my links.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Nation-Building Not a Military Mission
When the historians look back at the Iraq adventure, the Bush adminstration will be faulted for their idea that the military and an occupation administration could build a democracy from the ruins of a partial conquest.
President Bush knew the peril of attempting nation-building - he criticized President Clinton for attempting it in Bosnia - and he clearly stated he would not do it. But the siren song of the neocons was too enticing, and soon our troops had undone the Iraqi government. All that was left was to build a nation out of a fractured, sectarian-oriented society filled with angry citizens and foreign fighters. Our adversaries in that country had access to plenty of weapons, deadly explosives, and two major routes of resupply and funding. The situation soon became a civil war with the U.S. supporting an election won by the side aligned with Iran, a dedicated enemy of the U.S. This is a horror story.
President Bush is now implementing a "temporary surge", an increase of 20,000 troops aimed at suppressing the civil war. His hope is that the Iraqi government will be willing and able to control the sectarian leaders who put it into power - leaders who have objectives inconsistent with those of the occupying force. Because this "surge" is unlikely to succeed, long term U.S. occupation of Iraq is the only plausible means to keep Iraq from being a client state of Iran. Such an occupation will cost a fortune in U.S. casualties and treasure, but it is the probable strategy until President Bush's term is over.
Both the initial invasion of Iraq and the "surge" were posited on the idea that limited military means can be used to build a nation. However, history shows that success is predictable only when the military does what the military is trained to do - conduct all-out agression until total capitulation is achieved. The U.S. and its allies accomplished this in WWII. Germany and Japan were ruthlessly conquered and individuals who stood in the way of creating a new nation were imprisoned or killed. Martial law was imposed, and governments totally under the control of the conquerers were imposed. This strategy worked in WWII, but it was not the plan for Iraq. The Iraq plan was a naive one, a plan based on the idea that a conquered people with no cultural ties to the West would voluntarily embrace democracy and effectively implement it.
The military is the final tool of diplomacy. At the end of the day, soldiers kill or capture people until the political mission is accomplished. They don't worry much about collateral damage unless total victory can be accomplished while also minimizing it. "Occupation" is not a military mission, therefore, unless the ruthless tactics of war can be utilized, as in WWII, to totally suppress the occupied country. If the conquered country has a population that is generally united and supportive of the interests of the conquerers, the occupation will be short, peaceful, and concluded with an orderly departure of the troops. But if significant elements of the population are not supportive of the conquerer's interests, as is the case in Iraq, the occupation will be lengthy, bloody, and inconclusive at best.
The non-soldiers who planned the Iraq war did not listen to the career military. The soldiers advised going in with sufficient strength to suppress opposition and implement supervised civilian and security structures that met U.S. requirements. But Iraq is now in chaos, and the U.S. is neither capable nor willing to reinitiate the suppression mission that soldiers are trained to carry out. Consequently, the chance of finishing the nation-building mission is slim at best. The seeds of this defeat can be traced directly back to Bush's mistaken idea that a military victory over a hostile population could be consolidated with half measures. The Commander in Chief is learning this lesson the hard way, and school is not yet out.
President Bush knew the peril of attempting nation-building - he criticized President Clinton for attempting it in Bosnia - and he clearly stated he would not do it. But the siren song of the neocons was too enticing, and soon our troops had undone the Iraqi government. All that was left was to build a nation out of a fractured, sectarian-oriented society filled with angry citizens and foreign fighters. Our adversaries in that country had access to plenty of weapons, deadly explosives, and two major routes of resupply and funding. The situation soon became a civil war with the U.S. supporting an election won by the side aligned with Iran, a dedicated enemy of the U.S. This is a horror story.
President Bush is now implementing a "temporary surge", an increase of 20,000 troops aimed at suppressing the civil war. His hope is that the Iraqi government will be willing and able to control the sectarian leaders who put it into power - leaders who have objectives inconsistent with those of the occupying force. Because this "surge" is unlikely to succeed, long term U.S. occupation of Iraq is the only plausible means to keep Iraq from being a client state of Iran. Such an occupation will cost a fortune in U.S. casualties and treasure, but it is the probable strategy until President Bush's term is over.
Both the initial invasion of Iraq and the "surge" were posited on the idea that limited military means can be used to build a nation. However, history shows that success is predictable only when the military does what the military is trained to do - conduct all-out agression until total capitulation is achieved. The U.S. and its allies accomplished this in WWII. Germany and Japan were ruthlessly conquered and individuals who stood in the way of creating a new nation were imprisoned or killed. Martial law was imposed, and governments totally under the control of the conquerers were imposed. This strategy worked in WWII, but it was not the plan for Iraq. The Iraq plan was a naive one, a plan based on the idea that a conquered people with no cultural ties to the West would voluntarily embrace democracy and effectively implement it.
The military is the final tool of diplomacy. At the end of the day, soldiers kill or capture people until the political mission is accomplished. They don't worry much about collateral damage unless total victory can be accomplished while also minimizing it. "Occupation" is not a military mission, therefore, unless the ruthless tactics of war can be utilized, as in WWII, to totally suppress the occupied country. If the conquered country has a population that is generally united and supportive of the interests of the conquerers, the occupation will be short, peaceful, and concluded with an orderly departure of the troops. But if significant elements of the population are not supportive of the conquerer's interests, as is the case in Iraq, the occupation will be lengthy, bloody, and inconclusive at best.
The non-soldiers who planned the Iraq war did not listen to the career military. The soldiers advised going in with sufficient strength to suppress opposition and implement supervised civilian and security structures that met U.S. requirements. But Iraq is now in chaos, and the U.S. is neither capable nor willing to reinitiate the suppression mission that soldiers are trained to carry out. Consequently, the chance of finishing the nation-building mission is slim at best. The seeds of this defeat can be traced directly back to Bush's mistaken idea that a military victory over a hostile population could be consolidated with half measures. The Commander in Chief is learning this lesson the hard way, and school is not yet out.
Friday, January 12, 2007
Michael Savage - A Disgrace to America
Here in Rochester, New York, the old-line clear channel radio station is WHAM, 1180 on the dial. It was purchased by Clear Channel several years ago, and its lineup now includes Rush Limbaugh in the afternoon and Michael Savage at night. I often catch a few minutes of Michael as I get ready for bed. You know the old adage, "know your enemy".
Rush was initially interesting, but he soon became a bought person for the Republican Party and jettisoned any of the evenhandedness he seemed to start out with. His recent confession about "carrying water" confirmed the obvious. Nowadays, hardly anyone will admit they listen to Rush. But Savage has a growing audience.
Savage rages against anyone who is "different" in addition to always ending up in sync with his Republican masters on the national issues. His agenda appears to have evolved out of his rejection for a faculty position at a California university, which rejection he credits to affirmative action. He may be right about that, but that event apparently finished his transformation into one of the most dangerous, vile people I have ever heard. The big risk is that some of his listeners might actually take action based on what they hear from him.
We ought to worry when a really bright person gets twisted. As an intellect, Savage is to Limbaugh what homo sapiens is to a rhesus monkey. He uses his considerable wit in service of what he considers to be traditional American culture, and against what he calls "Islamo-Fascism". That is, he's all about getting rid of the Mexican immigrants and attacking Muslims wherever they may be. People whom he dislikes (including all liberals) are called "traitors", and countries that he dislikes are called out for summary nuking. In between his shouting rants on these topics, he mouths pseudo-religous platitudes and short vignettes about his dog, his restaurant choices, and his mother. The vignettes effectively humanize this truly inhuman person for his audience.
Savage has become rich by peddling his vitriol on the radio and in several books that entranced followers have bought by the millions. He effectively uses the lowest common denominators - fear and hate - to poison the minds of the uneducated and the provincial. Although he is highly intelligent, he never exposes himself to bright people with opposing views, prefering instead to bully poorly prepared callers to his show. And what does he accomplish on the airwaves? He fosters intolerance, racism, rage, and aggressive behaviors in the name of patriotism. He should be hoping there's no just God, because if there is, he'll have a lot to answer for.
Savage's latest crusade is to push for the release of American soldiers who allegedly killed Iraqis in cold blood, either in reprisal actions or as part of gang rapes. To him, these kinds of behaviors are just another part of war - but of course Savage was never a soldier. To him, murder is fine as long as the victims are people he doesn't like. Do you see the commonality between Savage and the terrorists he seems to find behind every tree?
So where does this put Clear Channel, the corporation that allows him to spew his vomit into the ether? Equally guilty. Sometimes freedom of speech is almost too painful to bear, and Michael Savage and Clear Channel are right up against the line. The republicans should repudiate this creep and call Clear Channel to account. They are a disgrace to America.
Rush was initially interesting, but he soon became a bought person for the Republican Party and jettisoned any of the evenhandedness he seemed to start out with. His recent confession about "carrying water" confirmed the obvious. Nowadays, hardly anyone will admit they listen to Rush. But Savage has a growing audience.
Savage rages against anyone who is "different" in addition to always ending up in sync with his Republican masters on the national issues. His agenda appears to have evolved out of his rejection for a faculty position at a California university, which rejection he credits to affirmative action. He may be right about that, but that event apparently finished his transformation into one of the most dangerous, vile people I have ever heard. The big risk is that some of his listeners might actually take action based on what they hear from him.
We ought to worry when a really bright person gets twisted. As an intellect, Savage is to Limbaugh what homo sapiens is to a rhesus monkey. He uses his considerable wit in service of what he considers to be traditional American culture, and against what he calls "Islamo-Fascism". That is, he's all about getting rid of the Mexican immigrants and attacking Muslims wherever they may be. People whom he dislikes (including all liberals) are called "traitors", and countries that he dislikes are called out for summary nuking. In between his shouting rants on these topics, he mouths pseudo-religous platitudes and short vignettes about his dog, his restaurant choices, and his mother. The vignettes effectively humanize this truly inhuman person for his audience.
Savage has become rich by peddling his vitriol on the radio and in several books that entranced followers have bought by the millions. He effectively uses the lowest common denominators - fear and hate - to poison the minds of the uneducated and the provincial. Although he is highly intelligent, he never exposes himself to bright people with opposing views, prefering instead to bully poorly prepared callers to his show. And what does he accomplish on the airwaves? He fosters intolerance, racism, rage, and aggressive behaviors in the name of patriotism. He should be hoping there's no just God, because if there is, he'll have a lot to answer for.
Savage's latest crusade is to push for the release of American soldiers who allegedly killed Iraqis in cold blood, either in reprisal actions or as part of gang rapes. To him, these kinds of behaviors are just another part of war - but of course Savage was never a soldier. To him, murder is fine as long as the victims are people he doesn't like. Do you see the commonality between Savage and the terrorists he seems to find behind every tree?
So where does this put Clear Channel, the corporation that allows him to spew his vomit into the ether? Equally guilty. Sometimes freedom of speech is almost too painful to bear, and Michael Savage and Clear Channel are right up against the line. The republicans should repudiate this creep and call Clear Channel to account. They are a disgrace to America.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Bush Digs Republican Grave
So, George Bush has committed another 20,000 troops to Iraq. It would be great if this investment paid off, but the odds are that it will not. Differences between the sects there, the problem of allocating oil revenues to the entire geography of Iraq, and the interference of neighboring counties will likely torpedo any hopes for a political solution. The violence is therefore likely to continue unabated, and Bush's decision will be shown to be a further futile attempt to achieve his objectives - objectives that were doomed even before the U.S. started this war. In the end, though, the most significant result of this decision will be to bury the republican party in 2008.
The republicans in the congress have no choice but to support Bush's decision. A few may waver, and some will second-guess and waffle, but they will support the decision and fund it without reservation. If the war continues for the next two years and does not succeed despite the deaths of many more soldiers, the republicans will be held responsible by the electorate. Congressmen and senators will lose their seats, and the democrats will win the presidency and hold both houses of congress with a significant majority. Republican domination of the U.S. government will go to its grave.
Rejection of the republican party's war strategy will, consequently, follow the people's rejection of the party's fundamentalist policies on stem cell research (soon to be approved over Bush's veto), its constant invasions of privacy, and its failure to take on global warming and the many major budget and trade issues that are festering. The neocon/fundamentalist alliance that has owned the republican party since 1994 will be buried along with Bush.
Will the moderate republican party of old - the one championing fiscal and personal responsibility, non-intervention, and a laissez-faire attitude toward life styles - ever come back? Probably so, because tides ebb and flow. But the neocons and fundamentalists are likely finished for a long, long time; even political purgatory will be too good for them!
The republicans in the congress have no choice but to support Bush's decision. A few may waver, and some will second-guess and waffle, but they will support the decision and fund it without reservation. If the war continues for the next two years and does not succeed despite the deaths of many more soldiers, the republicans will be held responsible by the electorate. Congressmen and senators will lose their seats, and the democrats will win the presidency and hold both houses of congress with a significant majority. Republican domination of the U.S. government will go to its grave.
Rejection of the republican party's war strategy will, consequently, follow the people's rejection of the party's fundamentalist policies on stem cell research (soon to be approved over Bush's veto), its constant invasions of privacy, and its failure to take on global warming and the many major budget and trade issues that are festering. The neocon/fundamentalist alliance that has owned the republican party since 1994 will be buried along with Bush.
Will the moderate republican party of old - the one championing fiscal and personal responsibility, non-intervention, and a laissez-faire attitude toward life styles - ever come back? Probably so, because tides ebb and flow. But the neocons and fundamentalists are likely finished for a long, long time; even political purgatory will be too good for them!
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Two More Years...O MY GOD!
We're almost ready to begin year seven of the Bush administration, with two more to go. Here are some of the highlights of the first six.
On Bush's inauguration day, the dollar was worth .986 Euro's - almost parity. As of today, the dollar is worth .769 Euro's. Bush says the American economy is strong. If it is, why is our currency worth 23% less after six years of Bushenomics? Deficits, entitlement overload, and a huge increase in the foreign trade deficit are the reasons. Don't even think of traveling to Europe - only people named Bush can afford it!
On Bush's first inauguration day, the price of a barrel of oil was less than $30, and gasoline was less than $1.50 per gallon. The increase in oil prices has taken an extra $100 billion each year out of America and into the pockets of foreign oil suppliers. In addition to impacting the balance of payments negatively, these dollars are strengthening many of the countries that Americans would consider to be our adversaries. I think I'm going to be sick.
In the lead-up to the 2000 elections, Bush unequivocally criticized Clinton's "nation-building" and said his administration would not get involved in it. Since March, 2003, Bush has unsuccessfully tried to nation-build in Iraq, spending more than $350 billion in the process.
President Bush said that his administration's major goals included a revamp of Social Security and the Tax Code, and a solution to the illegal immigration problem. None of these goals have come close to being achieved, and he took a public leadership role on none of them.
Of all presidents in recent history, Jimmie Carter has taken the most barbs for personal ineffectiveness and general obliviousness to the realpolitic of the world. George Bush and his cronies have already displaced Jimmie in these regards, even if the historians are not ready to make the official pronouncement. The trouble is, he has two more years to pad his reputation. O MY GOD!
On Bush's inauguration day, the dollar was worth .986 Euro's - almost parity. As of today, the dollar is worth .769 Euro's. Bush says the American economy is strong. If it is, why is our currency worth 23% less after six years of Bushenomics? Deficits, entitlement overload, and a huge increase in the foreign trade deficit are the reasons. Don't even think of traveling to Europe - only people named Bush can afford it!
On Bush's first inauguration day, the price of a barrel of oil was less than $30, and gasoline was less than $1.50 per gallon. The increase in oil prices has taken an extra $100 billion each year out of America and into the pockets of foreign oil suppliers. In addition to impacting the balance of payments negatively, these dollars are strengthening many of the countries that Americans would consider to be our adversaries. I think I'm going to be sick.
In the lead-up to the 2000 elections, Bush unequivocally criticized Clinton's "nation-building" and said his administration would not get involved in it. Since March, 2003, Bush has unsuccessfully tried to nation-build in Iraq, spending more than $350 billion in the process.
President Bush said that his administration's major goals included a revamp of Social Security and the Tax Code, and a solution to the illegal immigration problem. None of these goals have come close to being achieved, and he took a public leadership role on none of them.
Of all presidents in recent history, Jimmie Carter has taken the most barbs for personal ineffectiveness and general obliviousness to the realpolitic of the world. George Bush and his cronies have already displaced Jimmie in these regards, even if the historians are not ready to make the official pronouncement. The trouble is, he has two more years to pad his reputation. O MY GOD!
Monday, January 01, 2007
The War Trumps Everything
I'm an incurable optimist. Sometimes I'm right, like my believing that the republicans would be crushed last November. Sometimes I'm wrong , like my believing that the republican leaders would be sat down after they muffed the Foley debacle. Recently I predicted that the next two years would see considerable progress on some of the big issues, since everyone in government had something to gain by playing the game together. Now I'm not so sure. The war trumps everything. This president, the man who "made macho" more than any other modern president, is now weaker than any modern president - weaker even than Jimmy Carter. The bad guys called his bluff, and their hand was a lot better. Now he's stuck to the tar baby of the war because his last diehard supporters (the pseudo-religious right, the neocons, and the bitter Limbaugh/O'Reilly-lovers) are still behind it. He can't afford to lose them, because they would desert the republican party, too. A "new strategy" of a measured pull-out would take a lot of attention off the war, and maybe Bush could stomach ditching his dream of dominating a key middle eastern country, but the party won't let him. So the war will dominate in 2007, for worse. The democrats, on the other hand, are hog-tied in the senate and will have great difficult getting any major liberal bills in front of the president for signature. The blue-dog democrats elected in 2006 may well short-circuit any kind of amnesty for illegal Mexicans, even though Bush would sign a bill if it got to him. At the end of the day, democrats may settle for a lot of useless hearings on Bush administration actions (the war) and policies - sound and fury, signifying nothing. As 2007 peters out, all the attention will focus on the 2008 elections and the year will have been wasted. O, democracy! So, there you have it. I'm solidly behind an optimistic outlook for lots of positive legislation in 2007, and equally sure the war will trump everything, so nothing will be accomplished. 2007 is a crapshoot - let's hope the dice fall our way!
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Trump Mortgage "Fraud" - An Object Lesson
A snake-oil salesman named Ridings was hired by Donald Trump to head Trump mortgage. It turns out that the guy's bio on the Trump Mortgage web site was trumped-up, to say the least. He was a small fish with a fishy background, but he apparently swam his way to the top of Trump Mortgage by bamboozling the Donald. Or maybe not, but I got to give Trump the benefit of the doubt on this one - nobody as smart as Trump would knowingly hire a lightweight like this Rider guy to head an organization that is subject to endless legal controls.
This event should be an object lesson for us all. Don't accept anyone's bona fides before you have checked them. I am membership director for a volunteer ambulance company, and we get applications from the general population. Do I check references? You bet! In a previous life I investigated possible frauds for a major corporation, and I found that people can be very different than they are perceived to be. Since then I've been a great proponent of Ronald Reagan's famous adage, "Trust, but verify."
If the Donald belatedly follows Reagan's advice, we're likely to be reading a follow-up story soon.
This event should be an object lesson for us all. Don't accept anyone's bona fides before you have checked them. I am membership director for a volunteer ambulance company, and we get applications from the general population. Do I check references? You bet! In a previous life I investigated possible frauds for a major corporation, and I found that people can be very different than they are perceived to be. Since then I've been a great proponent of Ronald Reagan's famous adage, "Trust, but verify."
If the Donald belatedly follows Reagan's advice, we're likely to be reading a follow-up story soon.
Monday, December 25, 2006
The Day Before Christmas
Today I had the Christmas spirit. I just willed myself to have it - that happy spirit that puts a smile on your face, temporarily erases all the worries about how screwed up the world is, makes you appreciate your friends, and renews your confidence that God has something good in mind for us when we die. Maybe it will last through tomorrow...I hope so.
It's been a busy day. I volunteered at the ambulance overnight, but we had no calls so I got to sleep, rather poorly. Came home, showered, choir at 9:45, church at 10:30. It was a great Christmas pageant, and everyone who came in the door was offered some kind of costume item - hat, halo, crown, maybe even a robe or some kind of shawl. As the pageant went on, people from the congregation came forward and became part of it. Sounds crazy, but it went over great. All the kids were smiling, and the adults got infected with the good humor. My religion is pretty informal, but one thing I'm pretty sure of is that God loves to hear people laugh for the right reasons.
Then off to the ambulance again, as the medic from 12-3. Looked at a kid's sprained thumb and sent him home with his dad and three ice packs. Went to a home where an older man was having some serious heart and memory problems, and I gave him over to a paramedic for transport to the hospital. Then I took a non-emergency call to verify a death. It turned out I knew the family and was able to help them deal with it, since the older man certainly was dead of a terminal disease. He was the fifth dead person I've had to deal with in the past month, which is an unusually high number. Death is no stranger to me anymore; it's just what happens when we get old, if we're lucky enough to get old. It doesn't take a time out for Christmas.
My oldest son, who is divorced and lives in Detroit, arrived here last night around dinnertime. Late this afternoon we saw "The Good Shepherd", a very dark movie about the C.I.A. The movie was rather slow and confusing, and it made me happy I never wanted to be a spy. Following the movie, we came home and assembled a "luminario" (candles inside paper bags) in my small trailer in the garage. Then we went to the church and placed them up and down the driveways and lit the candles. It was a beautiful sight, since the church was also nicely lit up on the outside. Then home for a quick dinner with the long-suffering wife.
The 9:00 church service, where I also sang in the choir, was packed. The family I had helped in the afternoon was there, and I spoke to the widow again. The minister had good words to say, and lots of people participated in various ways. For some reason the spirit was especially good tonight...maybe it was just rebound from all the troubles of 2006, but it felt so good!
Three couples of long time friends came over to our home after church, and they stayed until almost midnight. We drank a fair amount of wine (I fixed one guy a potent Manhattan, too), ate some scrumptious desserts, and never once discussed a serious subject - a miracle! I have found after 62 years of life that there are few things in life more precious than long term friends. I can be "me" and not have to worry about it. I can hug them all, and be hugged back with a certain firmness that says "I love you." We are family after all these years.
That was the day before Christmas, a long day of responsibilities and accomplishments, focus on God's great gift of life, seeing a period attached to the sentence of another's life, and confirming relationships that add so much meaning to my life. The Christmas spirit provided a burst of energy that somehow sustained me all the while. It's great to have a 100% good day, and that's what this one was.
Merry Christmas! Happy Holidays! To all who stumble across this humble blog!
It's been a busy day. I volunteered at the ambulance overnight, but we had no calls so I got to sleep, rather poorly. Came home, showered, choir at 9:45, church at 10:30. It was a great Christmas pageant, and everyone who came in the door was offered some kind of costume item - hat, halo, crown, maybe even a robe or some kind of shawl. As the pageant went on, people from the congregation came forward and became part of it. Sounds crazy, but it went over great. All the kids were smiling, and the adults got infected with the good humor. My religion is pretty informal, but one thing I'm pretty sure of is that God loves to hear people laugh for the right reasons.
Then off to the ambulance again, as the medic from 12-3. Looked at a kid's sprained thumb and sent him home with his dad and three ice packs. Went to a home where an older man was having some serious heart and memory problems, and I gave him over to a paramedic for transport to the hospital. Then I took a non-emergency call to verify a death. It turned out I knew the family and was able to help them deal with it, since the older man certainly was dead of a terminal disease. He was the fifth dead person I've had to deal with in the past month, which is an unusually high number. Death is no stranger to me anymore; it's just what happens when we get old, if we're lucky enough to get old. It doesn't take a time out for Christmas.
My oldest son, who is divorced and lives in Detroit, arrived here last night around dinnertime. Late this afternoon we saw "The Good Shepherd", a very dark movie about the C.I.A. The movie was rather slow and confusing, and it made me happy I never wanted to be a spy. Following the movie, we came home and assembled a "luminario" (candles inside paper bags) in my small trailer in the garage. Then we went to the church and placed them up and down the driveways and lit the candles. It was a beautiful sight, since the church was also nicely lit up on the outside. Then home for a quick dinner with the long-suffering wife.
The 9:00 church service, where I also sang in the choir, was packed. The family I had helped in the afternoon was there, and I spoke to the widow again. The minister had good words to say, and lots of people participated in various ways. For some reason the spirit was especially good tonight...maybe it was just rebound from all the troubles of 2006, but it felt so good!
Three couples of long time friends came over to our home after church, and they stayed until almost midnight. We drank a fair amount of wine (I fixed one guy a potent Manhattan, too), ate some scrumptious desserts, and never once discussed a serious subject - a miracle! I have found after 62 years of life that there are few things in life more precious than long term friends. I can be "me" and not have to worry about it. I can hug them all, and be hugged back with a certain firmness that says "I love you." We are family after all these years.
That was the day before Christmas, a long day of responsibilities and accomplishments, focus on God's great gift of life, seeing a period attached to the sentence of another's life, and confirming relationships that add so much meaning to my life. The Christmas spirit provided a burst of energy that somehow sustained me all the while. It's great to have a 100% good day, and that's what this one was.
Merry Christmas! Happy Holidays! To all who stumble across this humble blog!
Monday, December 18, 2006
Policy Optimism - Or Pipe Dreams?
My friend Ron over at RWorld is concerned that the media and the electorate are overly focused on the 2008 presidential race to the detriment of interest in the policy decisions of the next congressional session. True, the celebrity candidates are getting a lot of attention, but I'm hopeful that the heat is on our representatives and our president to get some big things done next year. It has to be next year, since 2008 will bring nothing but electioneering.
Why am I optimistic? Several reasons. Bush will have no legacy except disaster in Iraq unless some major policy issues are settled during his reign. The republican legislators have been roundly criticized as presiding over the most "do nothing congress" in many years, and that failure was certainly a big factor in the November elections. And the democrats have got to show some vigor in 2007, or their ascention to power will be viewed as pointless. Perhaps the constellations are lined up right for a change!
The big question is: which policy issues have sufficient bi-partisan support to clear all three power centers? Embryonic stem cell research reform may be passed over Bush's veto. An immigrant amnesty bill probably has enough support to get through all the hurdles. Minimum wage uplift is a lock. Much work has already been done on Social Security and Medicare reform, so expect at least some action on one or both of these. If balance of trade talks with China don't move forward, legislative initiatives will come forward to, at a minimum, embarass the administration. There's a good chance that public concern about global warming will force another energy bill, higher CAFE standards, or some kind of tax carrot-stick approach to motivate migration to lower carbon-producing transportation. I'll bet my readers have a list that includes other potential policy breakthroughs.
One area where I don't see potential for progress is the tax code. The republicans and democrats are just too far apart in their basic approach to the economy.
RWorld recently posted a prediction that the blogosphere is gathering steam and has much potential to grow in popularity and influence. I agree with him. The bloggers will not stand for congressional inaction, and they will mobilize their digital armies to hammer the presidential hopefuls into actually doing something that will justify elevating them in 2008. Or am I only dreaming?
Why am I optimistic? Several reasons. Bush will have no legacy except disaster in Iraq unless some major policy issues are settled during his reign. The republican legislators have been roundly criticized as presiding over the most "do nothing congress" in many years, and that failure was certainly a big factor in the November elections. And the democrats have got to show some vigor in 2007, or their ascention to power will be viewed as pointless. Perhaps the constellations are lined up right for a change!
The big question is: which policy issues have sufficient bi-partisan support to clear all three power centers? Embryonic stem cell research reform may be passed over Bush's veto. An immigrant amnesty bill probably has enough support to get through all the hurdles. Minimum wage uplift is a lock. Much work has already been done on Social Security and Medicare reform, so expect at least some action on one or both of these. If balance of trade talks with China don't move forward, legislative initiatives will come forward to, at a minimum, embarass the administration. There's a good chance that public concern about global warming will force another energy bill, higher CAFE standards, or some kind of tax carrot-stick approach to motivate migration to lower carbon-producing transportation. I'll bet my readers have a list that includes other potential policy breakthroughs.
One area where I don't see potential for progress is the tax code. The republicans and democrats are just too far apart in their basic approach to the economy.
RWorld recently posted a prediction that the blogosphere is gathering steam and has much potential to grow in popularity and influence. I agree with him. The bloggers will not stand for congressional inaction, and they will mobilize their digital armies to hammer the presidential hopefuls into actually doing something that will justify elevating them in 2008. Or am I only dreaming?
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Lawrence Welk Reborn - Andre Rieu!
My angel and I took a quick trip to Toronto this weekend to see Andre Rieu and his orchestra at cozy little Rogers Centre where the Toronto Blue Jays play baseball. About 20,000 grey haired fans joined us to see Andre lead his 35 musicians and 8 singers in a two hour show. We went because we had seen him perform in several public television specials, and we like all kinds of music if it's done well.
Well, even from the peanut gallery it was obvious that Andre Rieu has a winning formula - fine musicians, lots of action, pretty lady and handsome men singers, engaging banter (sometimes serious), and an obvious dedication to making the audience feel they got their money's worth. He's Dutch, but his bread and butter is Viennese waltzes. In addition to those, his orchestra played some Christmas carols, the Canadian national anthem, and Stars and Stripes Forever. The encores lasted about 30 minutes, which seemed to be part of the plan, and everyone went home happy.
I appreciated the professionalism of the musicians, which was evident at all times - even when they did silly stuff to meet the needs of some audience members. Seeing Rieu one time is definitely enough, but he's a real pro and has got his thing down so well that it's a money machine. As we walked back to our hotel, it occurred to me that Andre Rieu owes a big debt to Lawrence Welk - he's taken Welk's model, exchanged polkas for waltzes, and made it work.
Toronto is perhaps the most ethnically mixed city I've ever visited, even more than NYC. Canada's liberal immigration policies have drawn people from everywhere, and they seem to mix quite well. Maybe our government should offer free vacations there for people from the red states...
Well, even from the peanut gallery it was obvious that Andre Rieu has a winning formula - fine musicians, lots of action, pretty lady and handsome men singers, engaging banter (sometimes serious), and an obvious dedication to making the audience feel they got their money's worth. He's Dutch, but his bread and butter is Viennese waltzes. In addition to those, his orchestra played some Christmas carols, the Canadian national anthem, and Stars and Stripes Forever. The encores lasted about 30 minutes, which seemed to be part of the plan, and everyone went home happy.
I appreciated the professionalism of the musicians, which was evident at all times - even when they did silly stuff to meet the needs of some audience members. Seeing Rieu one time is definitely enough, but he's a real pro and has got his thing down so well that it's a money machine. As we walked back to our hotel, it occurred to me that Andre Rieu owes a big debt to Lawrence Welk - he's taken Welk's model, exchanged polkas for waltzes, and made it work.
Toronto is perhaps the most ethnically mixed city I've ever visited, even more than NYC. Canada's liberal immigration policies have drawn people from everywhere, and they seem to mix quite well. Maybe our government should offer free vacations there for people from the red states...
Monday, December 11, 2006
Foleygate - No Crime, No Problem
The Foley report is complete, and none of the republican leadership will be disciplined, nor will any of the republican and democrat staff members who were aware of Foley's sexually-oriented internet contacts with congressional pages. And all these guys were re-elected. There is no shame in congress, nor in the electorate either, it seems. The double standard is alive and well.
This issue has nothing to do with Foley being gay. It has everything to do with his inappropriate conduct, and with the inappropriate conduct of those who knew about his contacts with the pages. Both Foley and those superiors and peers in congress crossed the line, but his resignation seems to be the end of it - nobody broke any rules, so they all get a little criticism and it's over. But it's not over with me.
I serve on the boards of three non-profits who deal with youth in one way or another. These organizations must have written policies regarding sexual harassment and very special rules with respect to conduct with minors. Sunday School rooms are retrofitted with glass panels to ensure visual oversight of teachers, and all youth activities will have two adults present at all times. Needless to say, if any adult in these organizations was found to be emailing a high school age person with sexually-oriented content, there would be hell to pay. The scandal would hit the local papers, would prompt visits from other interested governing bodies, would result in the dismissal of anyone who was aware of it and did not report it, and would severely or mortally wound the organization itself. Yet such conduct by members of Congress, in the end, generated only sound and fury. There were no consequences beyond those paid by the pitiful Foley.
I feel for those administrators who go to bed every night hoping that none of their people put as much as a toe across the line that day. For those conscientious people who run group homes, churches, schools, YMCA's, scouting programs, athletic teams and all the other organizations that deal with youth. They know that one person's lack of discretion, or even an innocent but suspect gesture, can cost them their job and the organization its place in the community. Unfortunately for them, they don't work under the same rules as Congress.
In the idealist's world, those with more power and responsibility are held to higher standards. In the real world, those with power and responsibility ensure they cannot be disciplined for anything less than blatant law-breaking. We let them have their investigations and white-washes, and life for them goes on as usual. What are we, nuts? I guess so.
This issue has nothing to do with Foley being gay. It has everything to do with his inappropriate conduct, and with the inappropriate conduct of those who knew about his contacts with the pages. Both Foley and those superiors and peers in congress crossed the line, but his resignation seems to be the end of it - nobody broke any rules, so they all get a little criticism and it's over. But it's not over with me.
I serve on the boards of three non-profits who deal with youth in one way or another. These organizations must have written policies regarding sexual harassment and very special rules with respect to conduct with minors. Sunday School rooms are retrofitted with glass panels to ensure visual oversight of teachers, and all youth activities will have two adults present at all times. Needless to say, if any adult in these organizations was found to be emailing a high school age person with sexually-oriented content, there would be hell to pay. The scandal would hit the local papers, would prompt visits from other interested governing bodies, would result in the dismissal of anyone who was aware of it and did not report it, and would severely or mortally wound the organization itself. Yet such conduct by members of Congress, in the end, generated only sound and fury. There were no consequences beyond those paid by the pitiful Foley.
I feel for those administrators who go to bed every night hoping that none of their people put as much as a toe across the line that day. For those conscientious people who run group homes, churches, schools, YMCA's, scouting programs, athletic teams and all the other organizations that deal with youth. They know that one person's lack of discretion, or even an innocent but suspect gesture, can cost them their job and the organization its place in the community. Unfortunately for them, they don't work under the same rules as Congress.
In the idealist's world, those with more power and responsibility are held to higher standards. In the real world, those with power and responsibility ensure they cannot be disciplined for anything less than blatant law-breaking. We let them have their investigations and white-washes, and life for them goes on as usual. What are we, nuts? I guess so.
Monday, December 04, 2006
In Memoriam
I'm sad tonight. One of my patients from a few days ago is dead. This old man smiled at me and told me he was alright after he fell down the stairs. I was hopeful, and I worked with a bunch of people to keep him alive. And so he was for a few days.
Life is precarious, especially when you are old. But some older people are more alive than others, and he was one of them. God bless you, old fellow, and watch your step up there!
Life is precarious, especially when you are old. But some older people are more alive than others, and he was one of them. God bless you, old fellow, and watch your step up there!
Abdul Aziz Hakim?
def. "Ignominious" - Marked by shame or disgrace. ex., American president meets with Iraqi factional leader Abdul Aziz Hakim at White House.
It began with "Shock and Awe". I guess it's ending with "Shock and Awe".
Never has America been brought so low in one week. Bush got stood up in Jordan by al-Maliki, who at least was a president. Then he met an Iraqi nobody who dislikes him at the White House. What started out as a short vicious war and "Mission Accomplished" is ending with an American president on his knees begging for a way out. Arrogance and stupidity rewarded with ignominy. America's worst enemies couldn't have scripted such a wonderful outcome - for them!
I'm not gloating over Bush's untidy end. This is all about America, and it's sickeningly sad. How is it that a country with so many intelligent, wise, compassionate, and freedom-loving people can be so screwed by one elected birdbrain? If this past week of infamy is not enough to get us smarter, then nothing will be.
I'll end with a question. Is the media going to describe the past week for what it was (ignominy), or will they leave that to the historians?
It began with "Shock and Awe". I guess it's ending with "Shock and Awe".
Never has America been brought so low in one week. Bush got stood up in Jordan by al-Maliki, who at least was a president. Then he met an Iraqi nobody who dislikes him at the White House. What started out as a short vicious war and "Mission Accomplished" is ending with an American president on his knees begging for a way out. Arrogance and stupidity rewarded with ignominy. America's worst enemies couldn't have scripted such a wonderful outcome - for them!
I'm not gloating over Bush's untidy end. This is all about America, and it's sickeningly sad. How is it that a country with so many intelligent, wise, compassionate, and freedom-loving people can be so screwed by one elected birdbrain? If this past week of infamy is not enough to get us smarter, then nothing will be.
I'll end with a question. Is the media going to describe the past week for what it was (ignominy), or will they leave that to the historians?
Friday, December 01, 2006
Aimless America
Can you imagine a football team without a coach? A class without a teacher? A business without a manager? Mature people know that leaders, although always imperfect, are the ones who put together the plan, communicate it, train the responsible actors, and ensure all is done to achieve the desired outcomes.
The need for leadership grows in importance as the size and complexity of the affected organization increases. Maybe a five person basketball team could self-organize for success, but would you predict an equal level of self-organization in a 60 person football team? Maybe a small study group could learn a topic by negotiating research and presentation responsibilities, but could a 400 student survey course at State U. do the same? Is is possible that a GE could stumble without a Jack Welch at the controls? A large organization without effective leadership is like a flotilla of warships steaming aimlessly in a fog, unable to coordinate their efforts and in jeopardy of experiencing terrible collisions, and rarely accomplishing their intended purposes.
Effective leaders have a clear vision of their organization's purpose, and they ferret out the information necessary to identify and prioritize the several goals of their organization. They communicate these goals and get active buy-in from their subordinates. They work diligently to ensure that the sub-groups in their structure plan and act in support of the goals, often coordinating effectively with each other. They measure progress, recover from the inevitable mistakes, and encourage all members of the organization to stay committed no matter how difficult their tasks may be. They recognize the entire group when each milestone is achieved and each goal is met. And they continually update their objectives, recognizing that each new year presents unforeseen opportunites and threats. By doing all these things, they continually build the capabilities of their organization and the trust of the people within it.
Do you see these characteristics in America's leaders? Do we share a vision of what America should be? Are the goals prioritized and clearly delegated to responsible people and structures? If so, then we all should feel confident that:
- America will have effective relations with every country in the world.
- America will have reliable sources of energy for the forseeable future.
- America will educate every citizen who is intent on learning, and reward achievement.
- America's streets will be safe for everyone, day and night.
- Americans will be free to live as they please, as long as they cause no harm to others.
- America will become more and more beautiful as the years go by.
Should not our leaders set the highest standards for our society? Should not our leaders be mobilizing America's incredible human and material resources to make these standards a reality? Must we face a major foreign relations crisis, a critical energy shortage, an incapable workforce, a pervasive lawlessness, a palpable stifling of the human spirit, or a desolate landscape before we demand leadership that makes us confident of the future? Or will it be too late for leadership if these evils come to beset us?
We have a leadership deficit in America. America is aimless. How can it be that our best and brightest seldom carry the banner of America? Maybe the time has come to re-think how we choose those who aspire to lead, or at least to refocus the criteria we employ in our current system. Or do we wait for the crisis?
The need for leadership grows in importance as the size and complexity of the affected organization increases. Maybe a five person basketball team could self-organize for success, but would you predict an equal level of self-organization in a 60 person football team? Maybe a small study group could learn a topic by negotiating research and presentation responsibilities, but could a 400 student survey course at State U. do the same? Is is possible that a GE could stumble without a Jack Welch at the controls? A large organization without effective leadership is like a flotilla of warships steaming aimlessly in a fog, unable to coordinate their efforts and in jeopardy of experiencing terrible collisions, and rarely accomplishing their intended purposes.
Effective leaders have a clear vision of their organization's purpose, and they ferret out the information necessary to identify and prioritize the several goals of their organization. They communicate these goals and get active buy-in from their subordinates. They work diligently to ensure that the sub-groups in their structure plan and act in support of the goals, often coordinating effectively with each other. They measure progress, recover from the inevitable mistakes, and encourage all members of the organization to stay committed no matter how difficult their tasks may be. They recognize the entire group when each milestone is achieved and each goal is met. And they continually update their objectives, recognizing that each new year presents unforeseen opportunites and threats. By doing all these things, they continually build the capabilities of their organization and the trust of the people within it.
Do you see these characteristics in America's leaders? Do we share a vision of what America should be? Are the goals prioritized and clearly delegated to responsible people and structures? If so, then we all should feel confident that:
- America will have effective relations with every country in the world.
- America will have reliable sources of energy for the forseeable future.
- America will educate every citizen who is intent on learning, and reward achievement.
- America's streets will be safe for everyone, day and night.
- Americans will be free to live as they please, as long as they cause no harm to others.
- America will become more and more beautiful as the years go by.
Should not our leaders set the highest standards for our society? Should not our leaders be mobilizing America's incredible human and material resources to make these standards a reality? Must we face a major foreign relations crisis, a critical energy shortage, an incapable workforce, a pervasive lawlessness, a palpable stifling of the human spirit, or a desolate landscape before we demand leadership that makes us confident of the future? Or will it be too late for leadership if these evils come to beset us?
We have a leadership deficit in America. America is aimless. How can it be that our best and brightest seldom carry the banner of America? Maybe the time has come to re-think how we choose those who aspire to lead, or at least to refocus the criteria we employ in our current system. Or do we wait for the crisis?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
